Motor distribution

VEX Robotics Competition Discussion VRC > In The Zone (17/18)
#1

Sorry if there is already a thread about this for this season but after recent reveals and competitions i thought i would ask, What do you think the best motor layout is?

Do you think that more then 4 motors on the chassis is useful?

How many motors should you put to stacking?

Pneumatics?

I personally like the idea of 4 motors for a stacking thing, 6 on the drive, and a pneumatic base lifter and cone grabber. What do you think?

P.S this is generalized not focusing on a certain design, but go ahead and share if you want.

#2

What I’m planning to do:

  • 6m drive
  • 2m mobile goal manipulator
  • 2m RD4B
  • 1m claw
  • 1m chain bar

However, if I can get an extra pneumatics kit from my sister team, I’ll be able to do this, which is much better:

  • 6m drive
  • 2 piston mobile goal manip.
  • 2m RD4B
  • 2m chain bar
  • 1 piston claw
#3

Here’s what I think will work well:
Drive - 6
Lift - 2
Chain bar - 2
Claw - 1 piston
Mobile Goal Intake - 2 pistons

Either that, or without pistons:
Drive - 4
Lift - 4
Chain bar - 2
Claw - 1
Mobile Goal Intake - 1

Not sure which of these we’re going to do though because I’m not sure if investing in pneumatics is worth it at this point.

#4

8 drive, 2 lift, 1 claw, 1 goal lift

#5

If I may ask, how are you planning on stacking cones on the mogos?

#6

By picking up the goal after stacking cones on it.

#7

I’m curious why you put 2 more on the lift without pistons? i would think that you would want to keep them on the drive or make a faster mobile goal lifter. Also i believe that pistons will be effective this season on internal stackers because how much you need to do a lot of things will only end up with 1 motor if you use 12 motors.

#8

I had the exact same distribution. However, you don’t need two motors on a mobile goal lift (if you don’t believe me, ALBA only used one as well).

#9

Yeah I’m starting to think that pneumatics might be highly useful. The reason I decided to put more motors on the lift is that if I sacrifice drive speed, I would need to speed up the lifting mechanism to make sure that there is no waiting on the lift when the drive reaches another cone. This way, it is not too much of a tradeoff and may even turn out for the better.

#10

This is our current setup, 6 turbo drive, 2 turbo 1:5 lift. 2 turbo chainbar thingy, 1 motor goal intake, 1 motor cone claw

#11

What is the speed of your mobile goal intake? It seems like, to make, 1m effective, you would need to gear it up a lot, thus slowing it down (and possibly damaging the motor)

#12

Alba did it :slight_smile: and they did it well.

#13

Exactly, 1 motor normal speed with 1:7 is more than enough for what im .planning (hint: not a 4 bar or anything like that)

#14

Yes but ALBA’s is also very big. To have a more compact system like the RI3D i think you need 2 motors because one motor will be hard to gear to cover 2 separate 4 bars 10+ inches apart.

#15

Rn i’m running:
6m drive (with 2 speed transmission)
2m rd4b
1m 1:3 chain bar
1m claw
Pneumatics for mobile goal and transmission

#16

Why wouldn’t you use the pneumatics for your claw as well? I feel like that and mobile goal are its two most obvious uses.

Also, do you have that chain bar built? Seems pretty ambitious for one motor, but I haven’t tested to know for sure.

#17

I mean 2 motor turbo 1:5 can do it so i don’t see why like 1 motor normal 1:5 couldent do it.

#18

I decided i rather save air for the mobile goals and transmission since when testing it wasn’t the best at conserving air.

Yes i’ve tested the chain bar. However, i haven’t had it go through the strain of a competition but oh well :stuck_out_tongue:
Attached is a picture of the rubber band setup i have with it. It’s made so that it’s always pulling the chain bar up and towards the center; so that’s worked pretty good so far :slight_smile:
Note: the reason it does this is that the rubber bands are attached past the chain bars pivot point so as it swings around the bands go under the pivot then back and up just in the opposite direction :slight_smile:
20170625_225106.jpg

#19

He said 1:3…

#20

I mean, im doing a turbo 1:1 (gear ratios still up for grabs rn) but it seems to be doing fine, the cones are so light that you really dont need a gear ratio for your chain bar